Isn't it like 80-85ish percent of rodent studies into human diseases/conditions are irrelevant? That's bad enough that it's hard to justify even using them TBH.
Which is one reason why murine research is an early (easier) step in scientific discovery and is never considered the final word in science without first confirming the findings in other animal or human models.
Robert Pruitt no it’s not a reason to abandon research in rodents. Although not a perfect model, mice and rats have helped us to make great strides in research in areas of human health like cancer, obesity, hypertension, and aging. Not all findings in mouse research end up being true for humans, but mouse research accelerates human research by decades and continues to help in finding treatments for many diseases like spinal cord injuries, cancer, strokes, immune diseases, and more.
It’s not just that it makes us more bored, it’s that we have a lot more time and energy to dedicate to exploring new things. Hobbies become a lot more interesting and possible when you don’t have to spend a lot of your time working, or worrying about work, just to maintain your living conditions.
"cognitive ability is dependent on context, environment and tons of other factors" So true. This is why everyone human child deserves the right to a decent educational environment.
Sadly, no matter how great the education system, or even just how much education people get, it's still fighting an uphill battle with religion, and it's "hindrances" in getting people to accept what can be demonstrated anytime it goes against their religious or political beliefs, but are more than happy to accept as true everything else science "proves". Even among scientists, the belief in a "god", or a "universal spirit or higher power" is shockingly high TBH. www.pewforum.org/2009/11/05/scientists-and-belief/ (There's an interesting trend in the data) But there's still a lot of "belief" even after decades of being a scientist. It's hard to beat indoctrination from birth.
@@lordgarion514 I think it's important to differentiate between having religion and having religion be a barricade to outside knowledge. I've grown up in an environment where most everyone is religious but very few use it as a shield to deny science. In other parts of the US, I'm sure that's not the trend by any means, but for those scientists with beliefs, it can be reasonably understood that they put their work before their beliefs, and are willing to add some wiggle room for everything not being literal. I understand your frustrations with religion obstructing and deconstructing education, though. It's probably one of the things that drives me up the wall the most with flat earthers, YEC's, and such. Still, I think it's less a question of having religion vs having a literal, static view of religion, and just believing every single thing you were handed growing up.
@@YCCCm7 The official stance of the Catholic Church is that both the big bang and evolution is true. But that god set it all in motion to turn out this way when he made the big bang happen....... There's a million ways to "reconcile" science with religion when you're ok just believing in more things with zero evidence. And some science needs little or zero reconciliation TBH. Which probably explains the different religiosity rates in different fields.
ALL finches tend to be jerks sometimes. lol We had a nest of yellow finches in a tree planted inside of a huge apartment complex and the entire time momma was incubating her eggs and taking care of her young, daddy would dive bomb anyone who walked by, bicycle by, rollerblade by, and even just drive by "their" tree. I remember one day sitting in the living room and suddenly I heard a familiar male voice outside yelling and cussing. It was our maintenance guy, and it seemed that no matter how far away he walked, that damn finch would NOT leave him in peace. By the time he got to our building's front door, he was out of breath and bleeding in a few spots on his face so I made him come inside to catch his breath while I washed up his face. He also got himself some kitty-lovin's from my Noah (pictured in my icon) because I was the only person in the entire complex allowed to have a cat (because he was my prescribed ESA, and how that knowledge of how to get around the "no-pets" policy came to be is a funny story all on its own...). Then I scooted him out the back door and he cut across the lawn to get to his apartment to avoid that bird. Also, every day when my husband came home from work, he would have to take the long way around, pretty much driving through the entire complex even though we had an entrance right next to our building, to avoid that finch dive-bombing his windshield. That was an interesting summer. lol
It's an eternal struggle and a fight I have no hopes of winning. Touching things is just too big a deal to give up anytime soon. But at least washing hands is easy enough~
NEW VIDEO IDEA :..Hurricanes are round, and one might expect them to do equal damage all around, but they do not. All hurricanes have a "dirty side" where they do way more damage and dump more rain, the question is why are they more powerful on the one side, the Northeast quadrant in the Northern hemisphere...What causes it and why is it always on the same side?
"Animals that have been treated in a rehabilitation center and released may end up dying in the wild because of diminished immune system." Me: "Uh oh."
and now we're finding that an environment affects the microbial community on / in each animal. Which then affects a lot of physiological processes. So it just gets more & more complex ...gah
Why not a mention of going from domesticated to wild? The transformation a grown domesticated pig goes through when it gets loose into the wild is absolutely staggering. And that's in mental and physical changes. It's like it's 2 entirely different species.
Fascinating stuff. I'm working on a video on socialization and training of black & white tegus. This provided some cool, thought provoking insight I hadn't thought of. Guess I've got some more research/rewriting to do! Thank you for the great video.
Depends on the school. Here in Toledo, Ohio, we have an alternative elementary/middle school that focuses on how students learn, and how well they learn, in specific subjects and places them in grades according to that instead of an arbitrary age. I have a friend who sent her kids there; her oldest son has autism, and the other two kids are "neurotypical". Without that kind of education, I doubt her son would have broken out of his shell or even graduated high school, but due to their diligence, one on one time he was able to take advantage of, and the fact that they would harness and focus on areas students tended to excel at, he ended up placed in a normal high school and tested two grades ahead of his age group. He graduated just before he turned 17, went to college, and now he works for the county library as senior librarian management and is engaged to be married. When I first met him, he was non-verbal and lashed out every time he was asked to do something he didn't want to do. He was on 5 different psychiatric medications. Now, he's on one medication for ADHD, and obviously has his whole life set up for him from having a good career started and a family to be started soon. The other two decided to home school because they were bored in regular high school, and his sister just graduated this year at 16. His youngest brother is in line to do the same. Now I went to a wonderful school myself, a rural school that really pushed all of us to do our best, but I have dyscalculia and struggled HARD in Math until 9th grade when I was placed in remedial pre-algebra (instead of Algebra I with the rest of my class), and I ended up with the teacher who was the head of the Math department and recognized why I was struggling right off the bat. We worked a LOT after school to find me a way of doing math that worked best for me, and it was smooth sailing from there. Literally. My Algebra II teacher that I had my senior year wrote in my yearbook "It must be nice to pass... I mean, ACE... a mathematics class by sleeping through it". But I have no doubt that if I went to a school like those kids did, I wouldn't have been a year behind in math through high school. In fact, I may have been able to go as far as AP Calculus. Unfortunately, being behind in math also meant that I was behind in the sciences as well, so I was taking Chemistry I my senior year instead of my junior year, which kept me from being able to take AP Chemistry as well. Even though I did well in my classes through high school after that first 9 weeks, it would have been really nice to have been at least at my grade level in those classes. It was very strange to me to be a year behind in math and sciences and simultaneously a grade ahead in English and Literature. My senior year, I had two classes with classmates in their junior year and AP English with just 6 other students who qualified for that Advanced Placement.
I think i read something about it being probably genetic for beavers that never saw their parents give a dam (sorry) started to do it themselves. I don't remember where I read that.
That actually depends. It has been studied, but not much was concluded. Essentially if a beaver habitat at a zoological facility has a prebuilt dam the beavers use the dam provided for them, but this is also seen in the wild when beavers see a half built or abandoned damn. Beavers who have a naturalistic habitat with water flow and resources provided to build with will take the time to construct their own damn or even make additions to ones pre built for them. It does seem to be a bit of a genetic cause as well as a behavior seen passed down, but it always seems that the animals will always judge the behavior they preform based off of what resources are offered to them in their habitats
That's really interesting because imo a lot of that actually suggests how much of an influence in the animal kingdom not only *intelligence* but also very specifically *culture* is. Like this is what that is, right? Especially with the orangutan example. They learn to fit in. They of course never fit in fully with humans, but nevertheless, humans have an effect on them and their culture - the ways in which they tend to express themselves and interact with each other.
Hyenas are labelled as bad probably because they are considered ugly. Lions are as cruel but hey everyone wants to be a lion right? Do they dig killing infants of their possible girlfriend? By the way domestic cats do the same. Don't start me on mice and rabbits as being closer relatives to primates than lions and wolves but hey no one wants to identify with them, no alpha male symbol heh.
Is it a "weaker" immune system? Or is it just a "less busy" immune system? I say this as a person who has some immuno problems. When my blood work comes back with a high White Blood Cell count, the initial reaction from nurses or even doctors is always alarm, because a higher WBC generally means infection or illness. Obviously this could not be applicable to animals but I feel like characterizing a higher WBC as a "stronger" immune system could be a mischaracterization. Regardless, I'm sure it's a good idea to ease captive animals into a release situation if their bodies aren't ready, so that there isn't a shock to the system.
It's technically both. A higer immune activity caused by an non-threatening X factor will also trigger a quicker and more efficient response against a sudden Y factor. More immune cells already active and multiplying due to the constant presence of X will lead to a shorter delay to recognize Y as a threat. Other changes like higher body temperature and nutrient redistribution in order to fight off X will likely slow down the spread of Y as the body is no longer as suitable for it to develop in comparison to a healthier organism. So may not be a stronger response, but is certainly it's more efficient. Of course, that only applies as long as X hasn't caused severe damage/consumed too many reserves that will likely make the now weakened body even more vulnerable to Y.
The problem with a higher WBC being stronger or just busy comes down to the norm for the body. Op admits they have a condition affecting their immune system so by average the have a lower WBC then the average human would thus a high WBC indicates a greater threat to their health even if that higher WBC is equal to the base line of the average human. A good way to think about the concept is to compare White Blood Cells similar to a nation's military or a city's police force. Some will have a higher presence because they system is better organized for more boots on the ground, others would have the higher presence because something major just happened that requires an unusually high deployment.
@Tom F: Ah, a fellow man of culture. Not to toot my own horn too much, but my eulogy for Sir PTerry is still some of the best writing I've ever done: tvtropes.org/pmwiki/remarks.php?trope=Creator.TerryPratchett
Well the species thing would depend on whether they are still compatible with the wild ones, but there are a few movies on what might happen if they get too smart for our cages
Evolution in this context would happen over hundreds or thousands of generations; complex, multi-cellular life doesn't just evolve. By the time Orangutans became aware and intelligent enough for it to matter, we'd either be long gone or well past any ethical issues you could presently imagine.
@Alexander Khlifi: Reminds me of this godawful tv & remote my mom got. The remote has no number pad, so there's no easy jumping between channels. It also has quite a few buttons for streaming services which we neither use nor have installed. I never thought I'd ever encounter a remote with too FEW buttons, but this one takes the cake by ALSO having too many unused buttons!
Maybe you would find as interesting the research done on Kanzee and Panbanisha the bonobos. As much as Susan the main researcher is sometimes a bit weird, their conclusions are that bonobos are cultural animals with a wide range for personality and intelligence plasticity and they can understand more than we think. It shows something that can be used as a model of how humans probably were more intelligent than they thought themselves before we created civilization.
_Hay,_ Master Therion, You sir, are a _cereal_ punner. _Wheat_ those _a-maize-ing_ puns, there's _barley_ anyone that can _rice_ to your level. Making puns is truly _in-grain-ed_ in you. Ok, that was _sow_ _corny,_ I'll _seed_ myself out.
So we can’t generalize between different species, but how about generalizations within a species, such as between different individuals of the same species? Are we sure all organisms of the same species behave the same under the same context?
kind of: you can always expect animals of the same species to react with a similar degree of intelligence (an ape will always be smarter than a turtle for an extreme example), but that doesn't mean they'll all be exactly equally smart, or express themselves the same way (give one octopus a bottle and s/he'll screw it open, do the same with another and s/he'll pull the lid off)
While I can't say for sure, there is definitly enough of the animal species mentioned in captivity to be able to test the hypothisists over and over again. He also mentioned that these have a lot of research behind them, so I would guess that there was a small enough level of variation to be able to prove these general ideas which apply to their respective animals.
Depends on the level of specificity of the behavior being described. We can easily say "all individuals of this species have problem solving capabilities", but as you get more specific, you need more data, in example saying "all individuals of this species can drop stones into a tube of water to overflow out floating food". While we know *some* corvids can do this, it's hard to say 'all' will be able to solve the specific problem, but can estimate out that all the corvids have *some* problem solving skills, can be accurately predicted with less testing of individuals
It depends if the action you’re observing is instinctual or deliberate. If it’s solely based off instinct then yes, you can expect an organism to behave the same way, or at least within the same group of solutions. But if it’s a conscious decision then it will be made based off of their unique past experiences in tandem with their instincts, and generalizations fall off the more complex or abstract the problem is. That’s with the majority of animals
No. There is individual behavioral variance even within many species of single celled organism. And obviously far more variance the more complex the life form. For example, my social intelligence royally sucks... because I'm mildly autistic. And it's not like it would be easy to diagnose a comparable issue in another species.
It's amazing what happens when food water shelter is taken care of. Better brain function comes from better diets...which we provide. I have fish that beg and chickens that won't leave you alone until you pet them. Not to mention the dog and cat. I think all animals adapt to their environment on some level.
Maybe that's as well why we prefer isolation for studying, or introverts love to get isolated to enjoy digging into interests. You enjoy your mind more (if you are free).
On the Eco-immunity theory, human history actually has a very strong and relatively recent example, with the Colonization of the America's. It shows how strong Native Tribes were to illnesses that originally were only found in the Americas but was devastated by pathogens Colonists/Settlers brought with them from across the sea, and the reverse with Colonists/Settlers strengths and weaknesses to illness is just as prevalent even if not as directly focused on in textbooks.
Side note: Orangutans become more curious and creative when their basic material and safety needs are met? Feels like I've heard of this applying to another species of ape as well.
uh, there's a hierarchy of needs that they figured out about human behavior a long time ago. I forgot the name of it, but basically it says that basic needs ie. food and shelter and physical and emotional safety. once those needs are met, then more complex (inovative) behavior can emerge. also the whole idea of an enriching environment is not new. I guess it's nice they are finally starting to study the "soft" sciences of the mind, intellect, creativity and how context affects results
I met an orangutan in a zoo in Washington State. She liked it if people colored for her on paper or the glass, and blew me away by _pointing_ at the glass wanting someone to color it with a pen.
I’m also curious about the behavioral differences between individuals of the same species. All humans don’t perform equally well on all kinds of tests, so how can a few animals be representative of their species?
I have a pair of zebra finches. The female pops out eggs all the time. The pair fly around my home as free range. They're insane. The male is so co-dependent. Screaming it's head off the female isn't right near it at all times 😂.
All I could think of after hearing the part about the orangutans is, “ah so you’re telling me some other alien species had us locked up in cages like an intergalactic zoo and that’s how we evolved”
Was at a zoo a few years ago, an orangutan was looking sad and coralling ants with a stick. No one was near the exhibit and he looked up at me and back at the ants expecting me to move on like everyone else. I went up to the glass and put my hand on it, he came over and put his hand up too. Made me sick to my stomach, I'll never go to a zoo ever again.
That’s sad to hear, if it makes you feel any better most great apes have a whole different range of facial cues and meanings for those cues than we do. Not to mention the structure of their face makes them seem stoic or even melancholy by human facial feature based standards. That’s why we can’t judge the emotions of non human animals by human cognitive and emotional standards. At their vary base animals express their emotions at a different level and in a menagerie of different ways that are pretty alien to us humans. What you may have seen as sadness was likely curiosity, but I want to be clear many in accredited zoos do not stimulate and enrich their great apes as they should which does result in actual stress behaviors. This is why you should always make sure that when you go to one of these facilities it’s a AZA non profit. Not only do these facilities have to abide by immensely strict animal welfare standards and protocols that are constantly being improved, but all the animals are there for a reason whether they be rescues, rehab cases, members of vital research programs, or members of accredited breeding programs. Also even amounts these quality facilities I only recommend the best of the best, as you should always expect the highest of care standards and ethical treatment of the animals you are going To see
So, Orangutans are more curious if they are locked up.... And you didnt use that as a perfect segue into being more curious during lockdown and learning with todays sponsor X? :D frankly, im disappointed..
To me it seems most zoo animals are seriously depressed. It's like they lost their will to live more or less, just waiting day after day for it all to end. Pretty much like most humans, very scary actually.
Do you have any evidence to back up that anthropomorphism? How does a snake look depressed? What does a depressed ant look like? Anthropomorphism doesn't help any species and as this video explained, we have learned invaluable information from scientific studies on captive animals. And have saved 888 species from extinction thanks to zoos. 🤷♂️
Is there anyone with a bit more of an adventurous streak that'd be willing to confirm whether you'll want safe search on before you try and find more information on that last animal?
This is definitely one of the most interesting episodes I've seen! And I've been watching for years. I'd love to see more videos on animal cognition, and primate cognition especially.
I used to volunteer for a zactuary with Big Cats, a couple of grey wolves, and a grizzly bear couple. The grizzlies had been together for most of their lives; they were rescued as cubs from a circus that went under and due to their constant contact with some not so nice "caregivers", they weren't suitable for release or for a zoo. Anyway, the sanctuary owner had never taken in bears before these two, so he had a lot of studying up to do. Turns out that grizzlies in captivity, most of time, will kill their own young at about a week old, even if they are completely healthy. In all, Jasmine (the female) had 3 sets of twins during their lifetimes at the sanctuary. Unfortunately, he was not able to get the first set in time. The next two took some significant manpower. Whenever she was in heat, Cody would get extremely defensive. From what we were told by the local zoo, their captivity enabled them to mate year-round, and the second set of twins were born around the same time she would have been coming out of hibernation, which was pretty late for a grizzly. He had no idea she was pregnant; she managed to hide herself from the owner from the time they mated in late summer all the way through hibernation (which was a little bit unusual because they never really hibernated since they had no real need to). He went in their enclosure one morning to feed them (something that had never, ever been an issue.. those bears ADORED him. He would go in there in the summer and wrestle with Cody without worry) and Cody attacked him. He BARELY got himself out of there. He spent 3 weeks in the hospital. During that time she had her cubs and we were like "OOOHHHH That's why Cody went crazy", but since he was in the hospital, we had to get those babies out of there. Basically, we had to tranquilize both of them in order to remove them safely and start bottle feeding them ourselves. But since Cody was so angry, tranquilizing him was really difficult. But we succeeded, and everything was fine after that. The last set of twins was easy. I have photos on my computer of my mom and I with the third set of twins being absolutely adorable. After Cody passed away, Jasmine became very depressed, so we decided that she move to an actual bear refuge run by a friend of his in Montana. She spent her last days with her now-adolescent twins running around a HUGE reserve with other grizzlies and all was good for the rest of her life. One of the twins still lives there, running around acting like a typical grizzly bear. Anyway, just my anecdote to add to the conversation that most bears (except black bears and polar bears) do not take care of their newborns in captivity unless they are in a position where they are able to be more wild and have less contact with humans.
I think we were Captive Animals too... And we start imitating our Role Model (Whatever they are who caged us) Yep... I think my theory Pretty much explains why we have table manners~
I mean it’s not that much of a stretch to say we evolved them on our own considering even animals with base level social structures understand hierarchies, group roles, prioritizing the safety of their children, and much more.
@@themotions5967 Yeah, you are right... maybe some dude in the stone age just went: "Hey! I don't like how you chew your food!!" And then proceeds to kill anyone who chew their food the way that other dude chew and then teaches his offsprings to never chew like that and making a rule for everyone in his tribe to stop chewing food like that other dude and telling them that they should exterminate anyone who chew like that and wipe them all from the face of the earth! Or something like that...
The cognition stuff can apply to humans as well, intraspecies. People don't all think the same. Some people work better in certain environments, or with certain tasks. And reasons for this can be both innate and acquired through our experiences. An obvious example results from education. Obviously people will be able to solve problems easier in their field of study. But the example with the orangutans makes sense when applied to humans. Perhaps some people end up less curious if they grew up in environments where them and their family didn't have the means to be as curious or playful
Dianne Fossey was completely hands-off with gorillas, and never appreciated Jane Goodall's approach which was far more hands on with Chimps, because she felt like it could disturb their natural behaviours. Turns out she may have been onto something, if this video is to be believed.
Is....is that a SciShow lab coat in your store? Now I’m no Doctor ( sorry Mom and Dad, I’m never going to be one!) but I’d totally rock that with a tank top and short skirt.
More like captive animals are kept in small enclosures for larger periods of time and just don't have anything else really to do. They don't have to look over a large territory you don't have to search it. You don't have any reason to not sit on their eggs it is literally the best thing to do at the moment.
Arrow poison frogs are so poisonous, they have almost nothing to fear; so when observed in captivity or in their natural habitat, they show signs of curiosity, meaning they might have the chance to develope their nervous system and functions past their basest needs and start becoming intelligent...
I suppose prison is the equivalent to captivity for humans. Are there any observable differences in behavior that can be attributed to just captivity, in humans? I think that would be interesting. I'm sure it's been studied a lot considering how many people eventually end up in prison
I wouldn’t call prison the equivalent of captivity to humans, largely because of the sort of people that end up there, with drastically increased violent and antisocial behaviours. Humans in true, zoo-like captivity is a really interesting thought experiment.
Prison is more like being in the kennels of a dog-fighting ring, what with all of the abuses by those in charge. Humans being in a zoo would be more like a very small, eternal summer camp. Can't leave, can't make a lot of choices, but you're fed and the ones in charge are actively trying to keep you healthy and happy.
@@OakenTome Sort of people that end up there? Umm... That's a massive generalization. Many are non-violent offenders. The prison system, at least in the US, however doesn't promote learning or exploration of new, useful skills or interests, but instead promotes brutality and violence. I do believe it's a good model of "captivity" for humans, in fact, it is very interesting, and troubling, to see how well a prisoner is doing in Sweden, before, during and after incarceration, versus in the US. Because there is a significant difference.
@@OakenTome You're right. The humans in there aren't necessarily a good representation of the average type of person on the outside, but it's probably the closest thing that'll ever happen
There’s plenty of research on the effects of solitary confinement. V-sauce put out a really good video in their Mindfield series that really does a good job talking about (and demonstrating) this topic. ruclips.net/video/iqKdEhx-dD4/видео.html
I mean this highly depends on the species we are talking about, their cognitive abilities, and how that can be compared to humans. Human boredom is unique as our more full grasp on existential concepts allow us to process our situation as something that is “boring” Animals (especially highly intelligent species) can certainly be under stimulated and improperly enriched, but they don’t suffer our exact form of boredom. Humans will mentally convince themselves that a situation they are in is “boring” and actively become disinterested in possible activities that would stimulate them, and even suffer depression like symptoms because of it. Animals on the other hand will actively look for new ways to enrich their daily lives (as long as the base level needs of enrichment and stimulation are provided) as they view every day as a chore list of learning and survival, and humans aren’t restricted to that mindset.
It's possible but captivity tends to reduce stress in most cases. Remember that in the wild, every animal has two very basic survival pressures that don't exist in captivity, predation and foraging. There ARE stresses that exist in captivity that don't exist in the wild, primarily constant exposure to stimulus and to life forms that either aren't or are much less present in their wild environment. Usually, the former more than compensates for the latter because captivity stressors aren't survival pressures. Sharks and tuna for instance do poorly in captivity because they need huge natural ranges to remain healthy and mentally stimulated. On average, the life spans of captive animals tend to be much longer than their wild counterparts which stands to reason.
Overly sterile environments also throw human immune systems out of wack. We played in the dirt when I was a kid and hand sanitizing gels weren't a thing and we managed to eat PB&J sandwiches without killing over from anaphylactic shock.
That depends on the animal not every animal is necessarily put through a larger amount of restive stress when compared to the stresses that same animal would face in the wild.
![Gunna - HIM ALL ALONG [Official Visualizer]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/HiCxoDeo0hc/mqdefault.jpg)
Lab mice have extremely long telomeres compared to wild mice. That has a real effect on the validity of studies using them.
indeed! though that is certainly taken into account and that's why peer-reviewing and utilizing the scientific method helps
Isn't it like 80-85ish percent of rodent studies into human diseases/conditions are irrelevant?
That's bad enough that it's hard to justify even using them TBH.
Which is one reason why murine research is an early (easier) step in scientific discovery and is never considered the final word in science without first confirming the findings in other animal or human models.
@@Omnifarious0 That video is way too long. Could you please timestamp where the conversation about that particular topic begins?
Robert Pruitt no it’s not a reason to abandon research in rodents. Although not a perfect model, mice and rats have helped us to make great strides in research in areas of human health like cancer, obesity, hypertension, and aging. Not all findings in mouse research end up being true for humans, but mouse research accelerates human research by decades and continues to help in finding treatments for many diseases like spinal cord injuries, cancer, strokes, immune diseases, and more.
Orangutans more curious in captivity, humans more curious in lockdown, I guess being locked up makes us apes very, very bored... :P
It’s not just that it makes us more bored, it’s that we have a lot more time and energy to dedicate to exploring new things.
Hobbies become a lot more interesting and possible when you don’t have to spend a lot of your time working, or worrying about work, just to maintain your living conditions.
"cognitive ability is dependent on context, environment and tons of other factors"
So true. This is why everyone human child deserves the right to a decent educational environment.
Sadly, no matter how great the education system, or even just how much education people get, it's still fighting an uphill battle with religion, and it's "hindrances" in getting people to accept what can be demonstrated anytime it goes against their religious or political beliefs, but are more than happy to accept as true everything else science "proves".
Even among scientists, the belief in a "god", or a "universal spirit or higher power" is shockingly high TBH.
www.pewforum.org/2009/11/05/scientists-and-belief/
(There's an interesting trend in the data)
But there's still a lot of "belief" even after decades of being a scientist.
It's hard to beat indoctrination from birth.
@@lordgarion514 I think it's important to differentiate between having religion and having religion be a barricade to outside knowledge. I've grown up in an environment where most everyone is religious but very few use it as a shield to deny science. In other parts of the US, I'm sure that's not the trend by any means, but for those scientists with beliefs, it can be reasonably understood that they put their work before their beliefs, and are willing to add some wiggle room for everything not being literal. I understand your frustrations with religion obstructing and deconstructing education, though. It's probably one of the things that drives me up the wall the most with flat earthers, YEC's, and such. Still, I think it's less a question of having religion vs having a literal, static view of religion, and just believing every single thing you were handed growing up.
@@YCCCm7
The official stance of the Catholic Church is that both the big bang and evolution is true.
But that god set it all in motion to turn out this way when he made the big bang happen.......
There's a million ways to "reconcile" science with religion when you're ok just believing in more things with zero evidence.
And some science needs little or zero reconciliation TBH. Which probably explains the different religiosity rates in different fields.
You are 100% right!
And if you think about it, that means access to food, healthcare, and a healthy living situation
So many new thoughts and ideas sparked in one episode.
Seriously! Great video.
Gavan Borgias is time of my
Sneaky how they do that, eh? Love it
So many episodes to watch, on multiple channels
"Zebra finches can kinda be jerks sometimes." My family, that had zebra finches for years: *Laughs hysterically in agreement*
ALL finches tend to be jerks sometimes. lol We had a nest of yellow finches in a tree planted inside of a huge apartment complex and the entire time momma was incubating her eggs and taking care of her young, daddy would dive bomb anyone who walked by, bicycle by, rollerblade by, and even just drive by "their" tree. I remember one day sitting in the living room and suddenly I heard a familiar male voice outside yelling and cussing. It was our maintenance guy, and it seemed that no matter how far away he walked, that damn finch would NOT leave him in peace. By the time he got to our building's front door, he was out of breath and bleeding in a few spots on his face so I made him come inside to catch his breath while I washed up his face. He also got himself some kitty-lovin's from my Noah (pictured in my icon) because I was the only person in the entire complex allowed to have a cat (because he was my prescribed ESA, and how that knowledge of how to get around the "no-pets" policy came to be is a funny story all on its own...). Then I scooted him out the back door and he cut across the lawn to get to his apartment to avoid that bird. Also, every day when my husband came home from work, he would have to take the long way around, pretty much driving through the entire complex even though we had an entrance right next to our building, to avoid that finch dive-bombing his windshield. That was an interesting summer. lol
Can confirm: parrotlets can also be massive jerks lol
"humans really like to touch things"
well, we try hard to not to nowadays
It's an eternal struggle and a fight I have no hopes of winning. Touching things is just too big a deal to give up anytime soon.
But at least washing hands is easy enough~
@@Kram1032 true! but sometimes I'll be counting changes or something then immediately rub my nose and be like "frick..."
@@sudalie7914 yeah... it happens :-/
In the words of my mother, "'We' is a lot of people."
*Well we try not to, nowadays.* You’re welcome. 😉
NEW VIDEO IDEA :..Hurricanes are round, and one might expect them to do equal damage all around, but they do not. All hurricanes have a "dirty side" where they do way more damage and dump more rain, the question is why are they more powerful on the one side, the Northeast quadrant in the Northern hemisphere...What causes it and why is it always on the same side?
The coriolis effect
Probably because they approach the US from the Southwest and they die after they hit land
"Animals that have been treated in a rehabilitation center and released may end up dying in the wild because of diminished immune system."
Me: "Uh oh."
and now we're finding that an environment affects the microbial community on / in each animal. Which then affects a lot of physiological processes. So it just gets more & more complex ...gah
Why not a mention of going from domesticated to wild?
The transformation a grown domesticated pig goes through when it gets loose into the wild is absolutely staggering. And that's in mental and physical changes. It's like it's 2 entirely different species.
It’s like twenty-somethings in their office VS twenty-somethings in a bar during spring break
And imagine what happens when it meets up with 29-49 friends.
It’s not going “wild” it’s going feral - you can’t just undo domestication
@@kristenbuckley8451 this lady gets it
@@kristenbuckley8451
You might want to look that word up.....
9:14
That seal must think it's in a one mammal parade.
Fascinating stuff. I'm working on a video on socialization and training of black & white tegus. This provided some cool, thought provoking insight I hadn't thought of. Guess I've got some more research/rewriting to do! Thank you for the great video.
Brilliant content as always, thanks Stefan.
"When we study animals in captivity, we may not be capturing what their abilities really are." You can say the same thing about children in schools.
Depends on the school. Here in Toledo, Ohio, we have an alternative elementary/middle school that focuses on how students learn, and how well they learn, in specific subjects and places them in grades according to that instead of an arbitrary age. I have a friend who sent her kids there; her oldest son has autism, and the other two kids are "neurotypical". Without that kind of education, I doubt her son would have broken out of his shell or even graduated high school, but due to their diligence, one on one time he was able to take advantage of, and the fact that they would harness and focus on areas students tended to excel at, he ended up placed in a normal high school and tested two grades ahead of his age group. He graduated just before he turned 17, went to college, and now he works for the county library as senior librarian management and is engaged to be married. When I first met him, he was non-verbal and lashed out every time he was asked to do something he didn't want to do. He was on 5 different psychiatric medications. Now, he's on one medication for ADHD, and obviously has his whole life set up for him from having a good career started and a family to be started soon. The other two decided to home school because they were bored in regular high school, and his sister just graduated this year at 16. His youngest brother is in line to do the same.
Now I went to a wonderful school myself, a rural school that really pushed all of us to do our best, but I have dyscalculia and struggled HARD in Math until 9th grade when I was placed in remedial pre-algebra (instead of Algebra I with the rest of my class), and I ended up with the teacher who was the head of the Math department and recognized why I was struggling right off the bat. We worked a LOT after school to find me a way of doing math that worked best for me, and it was smooth sailing from there. Literally. My Algebra II teacher that I had my senior year wrote in my yearbook "It must be nice to pass... I mean, ACE... a mathematics class by sleeping through it". But I have no doubt that if I went to a school like those kids did, I wouldn't have been a year behind in math through high school. In fact, I may have been able to go as far as AP Calculus. Unfortunately, being behind in math also meant that I was behind in the sciences as well, so I was taking Chemistry I my senior year instead of my junior year, which kept me from being able to take AP Chemistry as well. Even though I did well in my classes through high school after that first 9 weeks, it would have been really nice to have been at least at my grade level in those classes. It was very strange to me to be a year behind in math and sciences and simultaneously a grade ahead in English and Literature. My senior year, I had two classes with classmates in their junior year and AP English with just 6 other students who qualified for that Advanced Placement.
@@berryberrykixx get off your bubble
@@mki441 Wow, completely unnecessary. They were adding to the conversation while you are just a hateful troll.
We stay in captivity our whole lives don't you think
😂 When u try to say something smart, but are ignorant
I want to see a study on the ability of captive beavers to build.
How much do they learn or figure out and how much is genetic.
I think i read something about it being probably genetic for beavers that never saw their parents give a dam (sorry) started to do it themselves. I don't remember where I read that.
That actually depends. It has been studied, but not much was concluded.
Essentially if a beaver habitat at a zoological facility has a prebuilt dam the beavers use the dam provided for them, but this is also seen in the wild when beavers see a half built or abandoned damn.
Beavers who have a naturalistic habitat with water flow and resources provided to build with will take the time to construct their own damn or even make additions to ones pre built for them.
It does seem to be a bit of a genetic cause as well as a behavior seen passed down, but it always seems that the animals will always judge the behavior they preform based off of what resources are offered to them in their habitats
Stefan giving me Blue Steel is my new favorite thing.
That's really interesting because imo a lot of that actually suggests how much of an influence in the animal kingdom not only *intelligence* but also very specifically *culture* is.
Like this is what that is, right? Especially with the orangutan example. They learn to fit in. They of course never fit in fully with humans, but nevertheless, humans have an effect on them and their culture - the ways in which they tend to express themselves and interact with each other.
Thanks for including Hyenas! Wonderful animals with an undeserved bad reputation.
Hyenas are labelled as bad probably because they are considered ugly. Lions are as cruel but hey everyone wants to be a lion right? Do they dig killing infants of their possible girlfriend? By the way domestic cats do the same. Don't start me on mice and rabbits as being closer relatives to primates than lions and wolves but hey no one wants to identify with them, no alpha male symbol heh.
Thank you for this video
Is it a "weaker" immune system? Or is it just a "less busy" immune system?
I say this as a person who has some immuno problems. When my blood work comes back with a high White Blood Cell count, the initial reaction from nurses or even doctors is always alarm, because a higher WBC generally means infection or illness. Obviously this could not be applicable to animals but
I feel like characterizing a higher WBC as a "stronger" immune system could be a mischaracterization. Regardless, I'm sure it's a good idea to ease captive animals into a release situation if their bodies aren't ready, so that there isn't a shock to the system.
It's technically both. A higer immune activity caused by an non-threatening X factor will also trigger a quicker and more efficient response against a sudden Y factor. More immune cells already active and multiplying due to the constant presence of X will lead to a shorter delay to recognize Y as a threat. Other changes like higher body temperature and nutrient redistribution in order to fight off X will likely slow down the spread of Y as the body is no longer as suitable for it to develop in comparison to a healthier organism.
So may not be a stronger response, but is certainly it's more efficient.
Of course, that only applies as long as X hasn't caused severe damage/consumed too many reserves that will likely make the now weakened body even more vulnerable to Y.
@@Ivi-Tora: ruclips.net/video/cROY4m4Ftiw/видео.html
@@Ivi-Tora i mean we also vaccinate captive animals? so.
i agree with op, it might just be a less busy immune system.
The problem with a higher WBC being stronger or just busy comes down to the norm for the body. Op admits they have a condition affecting their immune system so by average the have a lower WBC then the average human would thus a high WBC indicates a greater threat to their health even if that higher WBC is equal to the base line of the average human. A good way to think about the concept is to compare White Blood Cells similar to a nation's military or a city's police force. Some will have a higher presence because they system is better organized for more boots on the ground, others would have the higher presence because something major just happened that requires an unusually high deployment.
How long til we have orangutan librarians ?
@Tom F: Ah, a fellow man of culture. Not to toot my own horn too much, but my eulogy for Sir PTerry is still some of the best writing I've ever done: tvtropes.org/pmwiki/remarks.php?trope=Creator.TerryPratchett
Two years
Ook
I've owned Zebra finches, and that explains a lot
Imagine if captive orangutans started evolving and became more human like... Would we still keep them captive? Would they be considered a new species?
It will be the humans that will realise animals are much more intelligent than we think.
Sadly.. I doubt it, we have had a LOT of problems with equality with other humans, imagine how hard it would be for an intelligent animal species
@@sailor5853 Or the animals will realize we're dumber than we look. Evolution has no friends.
Well the species thing would depend on whether they are still compatible with the wild ones, but there are a few movies on what might happen if they get too smart for our cages
Evolution in this context would happen over hundreds or thousands of generations; complex, multi-cellular life doesn't just evolve. By the time Orangutans became aware and intelligent enough for it to matter, we'd either be long gone or well past any ethical issues you could presently imagine.
I really enjoyed this one. A unique angle I hadn't thought about!
0:50
That was a good little fourth wall break.
*Very interesting video!*
essentially life is complex and simplifying stuff sucks
(welp that was a meta as florp since i just simplified that)
...florp?
@@porkcracklins630 it's meta to life. You wouldn't get it
@@louzerreviews Ah! One of those newfangled Apple doohickeys. Gotcha.
@Alexander Khlifi: Reminds me of this godawful tv & remote my mom got. The remote has no number pad, so there's no easy jumping between channels. It also has quite a few buttons for streaming services which we neither use nor have installed. I never thought I'd ever encounter a remote with too FEW buttons, but this one takes the cake by ALSO having too many unused buttons!
The segment on orangutan behavior in captivity and what it can tell us about human creativity is my biggest takeaway from this video.
Maybe you would find as interesting the research done on Kanzee and Panbanisha the bonobos. As much as Susan the main researcher is sometimes a bit weird, their conclusions are that bonobos are cultural animals with a wide range for personality and intelligence plasticity and they can understand more than we think. It shows something that can be used as a model of how humans probably were more intelligent than they thought themselves before we created civilization.
So what you're saying that we need to develop some vaccines for dolphins
Domesticated grains are also different from wild grains.
It's because they are... bread in captivity.
Good one.
Spammer
_Hay,_ Master Therion, You sir, are a _cereal_ punner.
_Wheat_ those _a-maize-ing_ puns, there's _barley_ anyone that can _rice_ to your level.
Making puns is truly _in-grain-ed_ in you.
Ok, that was _sow_ _corny,_ I'll _seed_ myself out.
@@My_initials_are_O.G.cuz_I_am You have a rye sense of humor.
Always love learning about my finches
So we can’t generalize between different species, but how about generalizations within a species, such as between different individuals of the same species? Are we sure all organisms of the same species behave the same under the same context?
kind of: you can always expect animals of the same species to react with a similar degree of intelligence (an ape will always be smarter than a turtle for an extreme example), but that doesn't mean they'll all be exactly equally smart, or express themselves the same way (give one octopus a bottle and s/he'll screw it open, do the same with another and s/he'll pull the lid off)
While I can't say for sure, there is definitly enough of the animal species mentioned in captivity to be able to test the hypothisists over and over again. He also mentioned that these have a lot of research behind them, so I would guess that there was a small enough level of variation to be able to prove these general ideas which apply to their respective animals.
Depends on the level of specificity of the behavior being described. We can easily say "all individuals of this species have problem solving capabilities", but as you get more specific, you need more data, in example saying "all individuals of this species can drop stones into a tube of water to overflow out floating food". While we know *some* corvids can do this, it's hard to say 'all' will be able to solve the specific problem, but can estimate out that all the corvids have *some* problem solving skills, can be accurately predicted with less testing of individuals
It depends if the action you’re observing is instinctual or deliberate. If it’s solely based off instinct then yes, you can expect an organism to behave the same way, or at least within the same group of solutions. But if it’s a conscious decision then it will be made based off of their unique past experiences in tandem with their instincts, and generalizations fall off the more complex or abstract the problem is. That’s with the majority of animals
No. There is individual behavioral variance even within many species of single celled organism. And obviously far more variance the more complex the life form. For example, my social intelligence royally sucks... because I'm mildly autistic. And it's not like it would be easy to diagnose a comparable issue in another species.
Neat video! Thanks for uploading!
Ape see ape do. *Takes 4 orang utans to a music concert*, the following week you'd have an indie band.
Flash back to biology classes in uni looking at zebra finches for hrs
STEFAN DADDY IS BACK, so everything is better now.
Interesting how conditions can change the reactions of animals
This is interesting and has implications for theories of innovation, economics, medicine, etc
0:51 stephan does ben stillers male model look after saying model lol thats great
Zoolander is the male model character that Ben Stiller played in two movies.
👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻 Nicely done!
It's amazing what happens when food water shelter is taken care of. Better brain function comes from better diets...which we provide.
I have fish that beg and chickens that won't leave you alone until you pet them. Not to mention the dog and cat. I think all animals adapt to their environment on some level.
You should do a video on the Channel Islands of California
Nature and nurture influence everything,
no one:
every prisoner: I want to explore new things
Maybe that's as well why we prefer isolation for studying, or introverts love to get isolated to enjoy digging into interests. You enjoy your mind more (if you are free).
Thank you
Good stuff
On the Eco-immunity theory, human history actually has a very strong and relatively recent example, with the Colonization of the America's. It shows how strong Native Tribes were to illnesses that originally were only found in the Americas but was devastated by pathogens Colonists/Settlers brought with them from across the sea, and the reverse with Colonists/Settlers strengths and weaknesses to illness is just as prevalent even if not as directly focused on in textbooks.
Big cool
"they'll still act on the threat whether it's real or not."
relatable
Random comment here reminding you to be happy today and to do that thing
Side note: Orangutans become more curious and creative when their basic material and safety needs are met? Feels like I've heard of this applying to another species of ape as well.
uh, there's a hierarchy of needs that they figured out about human behavior a long time ago. I forgot the name of it, but basically it says that basic needs ie. food and shelter and physical and emotional safety. once those needs are met, then more complex (inovative) behavior can emerge.
also the whole idea of an enriching environment is not new. I guess it's nice they are finally starting to study the "soft" sciences of the mind, intellect, creativity and how context affects results
I thought this was going to be about the difficulties associated with breeding wild animals in captivity... But cool video none the less.
Ah yes, fashion models. Ready for the catwalk. But seriously, those finches are cute
Really is this the best . I Think they are devolving. THEY being the authors.
Sick shirt.
Correction: "Captive orangutans are the APEosite."
Fascinating stuff here tho
I met an orangutan in a zoo in Washington State. She liked it if people colored for her on paper or the glass, and blew me away by _pointing_ at the glass wanting someone to color it with a pen.
Their intelligence is phenomenal. The one I worked with learned to barter for treats. Blew me away how clever he was
@@Leadbetter500 Food is the way to an animal's heart.
Cats in captivity will have better life expectancy than in the wild.
That's the case with a lot of animals, because their threats (starvation, predators, disease) are eliminated.
I’m also curious about the behavioral differences between individuals of the same species. All humans don’t perform equally well on all kinds of tests, so how can a few animals be representative of their species?
I have a pair of zebra finches. The female pops out eggs all the time. The pair fly around my home as free range. They're insane. The male is so co-dependent. Screaming it's head off the female isn't right near it at all times 😂.
All I could think of after hearing the part about the orangutans is, “ah so you’re telling me some other alien species had us locked up in cages like an intergalactic zoo and that’s how we evolved”
My behaviour plastistically says "oooh oooh ah ah gimme banana"
Questions? Concerns?
Was at a zoo a few years ago, an orangutan was looking sad and coralling ants with a stick. No one was near the exhibit and he looked up at me and back at the ants expecting me to move on like everyone else. I went up to the glass and put my hand on it, he came over and put his hand up too. Made me sick to my stomach, I'll never go to a zoo ever again.
That’s sad to hear, if it makes you feel any better most great apes have a whole different range of facial cues and meanings for those cues than we do. Not to mention the structure of their face makes them seem stoic or even melancholy by human facial feature based standards. That’s why we can’t judge the emotions of non human animals by human cognitive and emotional standards. At their vary base animals express their emotions at a different level and in a menagerie of different ways that are pretty alien to us humans.
What you may have seen as sadness was likely curiosity, but I want to be clear many in accredited zoos do not stimulate and enrich their great apes as they should which does result in actual stress behaviors.
This is why you should always make sure that when you go to one of these facilities it’s a AZA non profit. Not only do these facilities have to abide by immensely strict animal welfare standards and protocols that are constantly being improved, but all the animals are there for a reason whether they be rescues, rehab cases, members of vital research programs, or members of accredited breeding programs.
Also even amounts these quality facilities I only recommend the best of the best, as you should always expect the highest of care standards and ethical treatment of the animals you are going To see
So, Orangutans are more curious if they are locked up.... And you didnt use that as a perfect segue into being more curious during lockdown and learning with todays sponsor X? :D frankly, im disappointed..
No, they are more curious when their survival pressures are removed.
I really hate those segues. Just show us the product, don’t make it have something to do with the video
To me it seems most zoo animals are seriously depressed. It's like they lost their will to live more or less, just waiting day after day for it all to end. Pretty much like most humans, very scary actually.
Do you have any evidence to back up that anthropomorphism? How does a snake look depressed? What does a depressed ant look like?
Anthropomorphism doesn't help any species and as this video explained, we have learned invaluable information from scientific studies on captive animals. And have saved 888 species from extinction thanks to zoos. 🤷♂️
Well, it seems to me the universes of Dungeons and Dragons now need to come up with more great Gnoll inventors. :)
Or jazz musicians :D
Is there anyone with a bit more of an adventurous streak that'd be willing to confirm whether you'll want safe search on before you try and find more information on that last animal?
I've never seen a jay that couldnt get into a piggy bank in under a minute
So just by way of captivity, we are uplifting orangutans?
This world is endlessly fascinating.
This is definitely one of the most interesting episodes I've seen! And I've been watching for years. I'd love to see more videos on animal cognition, and primate cognition especially.
3:44 Does this mean orangutans would out-survive humans in horror
I used to volunteer for a zactuary with Big Cats, a couple of grey wolves, and a grizzly bear couple. The grizzlies had been together for most of their lives; they were rescued as cubs from a circus that went under and due to their constant contact with some not so nice "caregivers", they weren't suitable for release or for a zoo. Anyway, the sanctuary owner had never taken in bears before these two, so he had a lot of studying up to do. Turns out that grizzlies in captivity, most of time, will kill their own young at about a week old, even if they are completely healthy. In all, Jasmine (the female) had 3 sets of twins during their lifetimes at the sanctuary. Unfortunately, he was not able to get the first set in time. The next two took some significant manpower. Whenever she was in heat, Cody would get extremely defensive. From what we were told by the local zoo, their captivity enabled them to mate year-round, and the second set of twins were born around the same time she would have been coming out of hibernation, which was pretty late for a grizzly. He had no idea she was pregnant; she managed to hide herself from the owner from the time they mated in late summer all the way through hibernation (which was a little bit unusual because they never really hibernated since they had no real need to). He went in their enclosure one morning to feed them (something that had never, ever been an issue.. those bears ADORED him. He would go in there in the summer and wrestle with Cody without worry) and Cody attacked him. He BARELY got himself out of there. He spent 3 weeks in the hospital. During that time she had her cubs and we were like "OOOHHHH That's why Cody went crazy", but since he was in the hospital, we had to get those babies out of there. Basically, we had to tranquilize both of them in order to remove them safely and start bottle feeding them ourselves. But since Cody was so angry, tranquilizing him was really difficult. But we succeeded, and everything was fine after that. The last set of twins was easy. I have photos on my computer of my mom and I with the third set of twins being absolutely adorable. After Cody passed away, Jasmine became very depressed, so we decided that she move to an actual bear refuge run by a friend of his in Montana. She spent her last days with her now-adolescent twins running around a HUGE reserve with other grizzlies and all was good for the rest of her life. One of the twins still lives there, running around acting like a typical grizzly bear. Anyway, just my anecdote to add to the conversation that most bears (except black bears and polar bears) do not take care of their newborns in captivity unless they are in a position where they are able to be more wild and have less contact with humans.
Hey! Maybe that's the key. Teach the young something advance so if they were released back to the wild, their survivability increased.
I think we were Captive Animals too... And we start imitating our Role Model (Whatever they are who caged us)
Yep... I think my theory Pretty much explains why we have table manners~
I mean it’s not that much of a stretch to say we evolved them on our own considering even animals with base level social structures understand hierarchies, group roles, prioritizing the safety of their children, and much more.
@@themotions5967 Yeah, you are right... maybe some dude in the stone age just went: "Hey! I don't like how you chew your food!!"
And then proceeds to kill anyone who chew their food the way that other dude chew and then teaches his offsprings to never chew like that and making a rule for everyone in his tribe to stop chewing food like that other dude and telling them that they should exterminate anyone who chew like that and wipe them all from the face of the earth!
Or something like that...
The cognition stuff can apply to humans as well, intraspecies. People don't all think the same. Some people work better in certain environments, or with certain tasks. And reasons for this can be both innate and acquired through our experiences. An obvious example results from education. Obviously people will be able to solve problems easier in their field of study. But the example with the orangutans makes sense when applied to humans. Perhaps some people end up less curious if they grew up in environments where them and their family didn't have the means to be as curious or playful
Hmm, seems orangutan uplift has already started.
For research purposes ofc
Game addiction is a misnomer
The orangutan in the Henry Doorly Zoo in Omaha is lazy instead. He just makes grabby hands until some kid gives in and throws him food.
A lot of ancient peoples regularly consumed psilocybin mushrooms, maybe they learned how to think more creatively.
Is it me or the speaker gotten more ripped. His arms are getting bigger. The real definition of hit the books
Go go Sci Show
The main difference is they don’t have to face danger
Dianne Fossey was completely hands-off with gorillas, and never appreciated Jane Goodall's approach which was far more hands on with Chimps, because she felt like it could disturb their natural behaviours. Turns out she may have been onto something, if this video is to be believed.
Is....is that a SciShow lab coat in your store? Now I’m no Doctor ( sorry Mom and Dad, I’m never going to be one!) but I’d totally rock that with a tank top and short skirt.
More like captive animals are kept in small enclosures for larger periods of time and just don't have anything else really to do. They don't have to look over a large territory you don't have to search it. You don't have any reason to not sit on their eggs it is literally the best thing to do at the moment.
Yup, parrots only speak in captivity. They're bored af.
No. Lol.
Arrow poison frogs are so poisonous, they have almost nothing to fear; so when observed in captivity or in their natural habitat, they show signs of curiosity, meaning they might have the chance to develope their nervous system and functions past their basest needs and start becoming intelligent...
I suppose prison is the equivalent to captivity for humans. Are there any observable differences in behavior that can be attributed to just captivity, in humans? I think that would be interesting. I'm sure it's been studied a lot considering how many people eventually end up in prison
I wouldn’t call prison the equivalent of captivity to humans, largely because of the sort of people that end up there, with drastically increased violent and antisocial behaviours.
Humans in true, zoo-like captivity is a really interesting thought experiment.
Prison is more like being in the kennels of a dog-fighting ring, what with all of the abuses by those in charge.
Humans being in a zoo would be more like a very small, eternal summer camp. Can't leave, can't make a lot of choices, but you're fed and the ones in charge are actively trying to keep you healthy and happy.
@@OakenTome Sort of people that end up there? Umm... That's a massive generalization. Many are non-violent offenders. The prison system, at least in the US, however doesn't promote learning or exploration of new, useful skills or interests, but instead promotes brutality and violence. I do believe it's a good model of "captivity" for humans, in fact, it is very interesting, and troubling, to see how well a prisoner is doing in Sweden, before, during and after incarceration, versus in the US. Because there is a significant difference.
@@OakenTome You're right. The humans in there aren't necessarily a good representation of the average type of person on the outside, but it's probably the closest thing that'll ever happen
There’s plenty of research on the effects of solitary confinement.
V-sauce put out a really good video in their Mindfield series that really does a good job talking about (and demonstrating) this topic. ruclips.net/video/iqKdEhx-dD4/видео.html
I've got a weird feeling he was one of my Fallout: New Vegas characters
The observer effect.
is there a connection between boredom and creativity while in captivity?
I mean this highly depends on the species we are talking about, their cognitive abilities, and how that can be compared to humans.
Human boredom is unique as our more full grasp on existential concepts allow us to process our situation as something that is “boring”
Animals (especially highly intelligent species) can certainly be under stimulated and improperly enriched, but they don’t suffer our exact form of boredom. Humans will mentally convince themselves that a situation they are in is “boring” and actively become disinterested in possible activities that would stimulate them, and even suffer depression like symptoms because of it. Animals on the other hand will actively look for new ways to enrich their daily lives (as long as the base level needs of enrichment and stimulation are provided) as they view every day as a chore list of learning and survival, and humans aren’t restricted to that mindset.
We don't have better immune system in captivity. Don't we all just saw that during the quarentenes?
Could stress from captivity reduce animal immune system
It's possible but captivity tends to reduce stress in most cases. Remember that in the wild, every animal has two very basic survival pressures that don't exist in captivity, predation and foraging. There ARE stresses that exist in captivity that don't exist in the wild, primarily constant exposure to stimulus and to life forms that either aren't or are much less present in their wild environment.
Usually, the former more than compensates for the latter because captivity stressors aren't survival pressures.
Sharks and tuna for instance do poorly in captivity because they need huge natural ranges to remain healthy and mentally stimulated.
On average, the life spans of captive animals tend to be much longer than their wild counterparts which stands to reason.
Overly sterile environments also throw human immune systems out of wack. We played in the dirt when I was a kid and hand sanitizing gels weren't a thing and we managed to eat PB&J sandwiches without killing over from anaphylactic shock.
That depends on the animal not every animal is necessarily put through a larger amount of restive stress when compared to the stresses that same animal would face in the wild.
they let the eggs get cold, but the eggs don't die.
I have to wonder, how much of this applies to humans in captivity? Does imprisonment, especially over a long term, affect humans in similar ways?
Absolutely. It is mentally taxing and there is a known correlation between stress and a weak immune system.
I wonder if wild great apes have a sense of self like captive apes do? I don’t think anyone’s done a experiment to see if they have or not?
so basically we're slowly creating smarter and more adaptive apes. I feel like I've seen that movie before.
'If the body doesn't think....'. How does that happen. This statement implies the body just decided something?